This is likely true for budding academics as well.  We graduate students think we will be nothing like our professors. I say we should learn from their behavior; analyze them in their natural environment.  That said, I have gathered here 5 models of academic summer behavior , drawn from academics’ answers to the question, “what are your summer plans?”–care of The Chronicle of Higher Education’s Online Forums.

Please sit back, relax, and project yourself into each of these paradigms as you drink alone and wonder what kind of professor you will be in twenty years.

#1.

Name: I call this the “Summer-Maximization” model.  It could also be called the, “Use up spare time with Crystal Methamphetamine” model.

I mean, come on, “Sew something, anything” and “Paint something, anything”?

“Write 11 chapters”? “Complete a triathlon”!?

Tweak 202, indeed.

Foreshadowing: this should make us think about the disappointment inherent in over-planning our free time (a concern listed frequently in the CoHE forums).  And, yes, this clearly proves that coffee is a gateway drug.

#2.

Name: “Priority Disequilibrium” model.

Once externalities arise in our personal lives (due to the demands of our professional lives), it is high time to stop what we’re doing and re-arrange our priorities.

That probably starts with putting parenting and divorce in your top 3.  At least above swimming.

Foreshadowing: I was told early on by a helpful professor that graduate school was a ‘selfish endeavor’ and that he ‘knew only one couple that made it through the process’.  Fair enough.  A model like this is in disequilibrium and will find a new state eventually; one that depends on what we do with something like, I don’t know, a summer that has no teaching for the first time in six years.

#3.

Name: “Pull a JD Salinger” model.

Full disclosure: this was pretty much my M.O. last summer.  But mine was less social-aversion and more to do with finding the ‘will-to-shower’ again.

Either way, I warn strongly against including a ‘commune with the cats’ and ‘margaritas’.  That life path does not end by fall semester.

Foreshadowing: clearly this model of behavior is dependent upon the masochism you accrue during the two semesters proceeding summer.  If you choose to pack in the extra classes and research projects, then you’d better make sure your future cat commune won’t charge rent for a few weeks each year.

#4.

Name: “Pentagon Grant Researcher” or “Full-Blown Schizophrenia”

Here’s a case of an academic who has finally received a big government grant to study that airborne virus s/he’s been writing about for a decade… or someone whose busy finals schedule conflicted with their lithium prescription schedule.

Foreshadowing: this model shows signs of perceived grandeur, a common affliction among over-worked, over-educated academics.  Just keep in mind: the government frowns upon telling everyone that you can’t tell anyone anything about something–regardless if its because of a big grant.

#5.

Name: “Land Unlocked” model.

There is no image for this model.  There is only a statistic:

about 38% of all entries in this forum contained the word(s) “boat”, “canoe”, or “kayak”.

There are an incredible amount of academics interested in and excited about being out on the water, frequently with friends and family.

One even spoke of having a memorial for a beloved friend who had recently passed.

Foreshadowing: books and kindles don’t fare so well in the hull of a kayak, but friends and coolers full of beer appear to do just fine.  This is a model worth imitation in the future and one that inspires some hope for an academic life that enjoys both peace and people.

Now I need to get home… I’d hate for my wife to realize that I had been blogging for the past two hours.

Andrew Ross, NYU professor and one of the organizers with the Occupy Student Debt 1TDAY campaign is quoted as saying, “Trillion Dollar day is a reminder that private banks are still very much in the predatory lending business; this time it’s students not homeowners.”  Is loan-sharking outlawed in the United States.

It’s not quite as bad but essentially it’s true.  In a very base analysis, student loans are unsecured debt backed by only the promise to pay back by the debtor.  The lender has limited recourse in recouping losses should the debtor decide not to pay it back.  No collateral is involved that the debtor has pledged or a lender can seize in the event of a default.

Interest can keep piling on and your student loan tab can keep going up but repayment is totally up to the borrower.  Lenders would have rights in civil court including excluding non-payers from credit markets but slavery is certainly outlawed in the United States.  There is a ceiling on the possible future outcomes as a consequence of borrowing to go to school.

Current U.S. law do not allow student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy but a distinction needs to be made regarding U.S. federal government loans (fixed interest rates, income based repayment options, robust consumer protections) and private [loans] (variable and sometimes usurious rates, inscrutable terminology, few borrower protections).

The just linked Bloomberg article quoting NERA Economic Consulting is a good read.  Also, the NERA survey and analysis was interestingly summarized by Bloomberg and further summarized here, “about two-thirds of private-loan borrowers” are idiots.  Recent legislation have eased the burden for new student borrowers, sweetening the deal so much that you don’t deserve to go to school if you don’t max out your government loans before even thinking of incurring any privately lent debt.

I do believe that yes, we should all pay our debts.  People are betting on our futures but all parties should bear the risks of an uncertain future.  The future is so uncertain for students that the government is rightly the primarily lender in the student loan market.  With the federal government having such a central role, will this $1 trillion dollar student debt bubble end much like the recent bust in the housing market?

Look, after borrowing for an education, I’m going to need income to pay back my student loans.  Most earn an income by being employed, I’m going to need to be employed.  Therefore, if you want it back, you’re going to have to pay me one million dollars! Sorry, one hundred billions dollars!

Ok, perhaps it’s a little dramatic, but how is this time supposed to be different from the late 90’s when the eurozone countries were capped at borrowing 3% of their total output and took that merely as suggestion? Do they know how big the hole is that they’re trying to plug, or are they just throwing around Monopoly money and expecting interest back every time they take a round of the board?

The UK is hardly in a position to be lending money, but they will do it to save face. Also, they have it on good authority that in the 67 years that the IMF has been alive, no lender has lost money. Well that’s comforting. Although that’s what I thought when I got private health insurance and then realized I should probably not put as much stock in insurance.

Other member countries were encouraged when Japan promised $60 billion, an amount they hoped would strengthen the ‘firewall’ around any possible European collapse. The G7 and G20 members said uplifting things like ‘double the firepower’ and ‘no room for complacency’ when applauding the efforts of such a collective. In fact, there was so much generosity that the IMF’s MD, Christine Lagarde was ‘mesmerized’ and had to excuse herself just after Brazil pledged money but right before they started to emphasize their need to have greater voting power. Apparently the BRIC countries didn’t take it personally and still promised they would add to the pot.

While it is possible all the money may not be loaned, it is also possible that it will. With this collective willingness to show cooperation and take on the eurozone crisis as a global one, are we rewriting an old adage to read: “Divided we stand, united we fall”? Perhaps I shouldn’t be such a harsh judge; after all, this situation is unprecedented and the IMF knows what it’s doing – they’ve been around for long enough. This time things will be different. [Insert platitude here].

Four years later, the IMF considers Iceland, who has already started early repayment, a successful recovery. While the rest of the world is facing austerity measures, Iceland re-stabilized by strengthening its welfare state.

However, Icelanders’ faith in their economy and government still needs stabilization. In more bold, unorthodox moves, Iceland has begun prosecuting bankers. March also marks the beginning of the trial against former Prime Minister, Geir Haarde. He is charged with not doing everything he could to avoid the crisis. He believes he is playing the scape goat and also accuses England of freezing Icelandic assets and leading to the fall of the third largest bank, Glitnir.  This may reflect what Michael Stothard suggests is an overarching lack of faith in the political system.

In one final move demonstrating adaptability and creativity, Jon Gnarr, a local comedian, and several of his friends launched a new political party — The Best Party — making absurd promises with no intent to uphold them or even to get elected. The Best Party was meant as a protest of sorts, highlighting the ridiculousness of politics. All the same, The Best Party took 6 of 15 city council seats and he was elected with a vote of 34.7%. Now in office, he takes his position very seriously, though that can still mean free towels at spas and perhaps a polar bear for the zoo.

Iceland serves as a unique example of recovery from the financial crisis. Their unorthodox moves seemed to have saved them. Furthermore their quest for accountability seems to be renewing faith in the economic and political structures. While other countries are still on the quest to get out of the red, are there lessons we can take away from the path they followed?

For your viewing pleasure: Besti Flokurinn

In the mean time, we will be using this blog to open discussions on a variety of economic topics. You can expect posts from us every two weeks and perhaps a few guest posts along the way. We look forward to hearing your comments on the topics we present.

It is my pleasure to introduce the 2012 staff! And don’t forget to download your copy of the 2011 New School Economics Review!

Editor in Chief:

Nadia Hashmi is in her first year of an M.A. in Global Political Economy and Finance at NSSR. She graduated from Sarah Lawrence College with a B.A. in development economics and wants to continue in this field, specifically in the area of economic policy implementation in South Asia.

Associate Editors:

Alexandria Eisenbarth is a first-year M.A. student. Having escaped the hegemony of Harvard’s strongly if not exclusively neoclassical economic department with an A.B. in 2009, she is now home to roost in the intellectually responsible atmosphere of heterodox economics at NSSR. Her interests include international trade, international development, and the challenge of quantifying measures that are qualitatively important to us.

Carolina Holt graduated with honors from The New School in 2011 with a B.A. in Economics and will complete her coursework for the M.A. program by the end of this summer.  Carolina is interested in the distributional and revenue effects of corporate and financial sector taxation.

Voltaire Veloso earned his B.A. in Development Economics from Drew University. He is currently enjoying the heterodox tradition of  NSSR’s Economics department and is expecting to finish his M.A. this Spring 2012. His interests include feminist Economics, population issues and financial Economics.

Brandt Weathers is a second year (pending) PhD economics student at The New School, as well as last year’s Editor-In-Chief of the New School Economic Review.  His departmental interests include development, political economy, and micro.  When he has time, he prefers to read social histories (of almost anything), critical theology, and the works of Noam Chomsky.  Most importantly, Brandt is married to an amazing lady named Nicole, attends Quaker meetings, and takes out his grad school frustrations on the YMCA treadmills.

Download Here

The 2011 NSER team is proud to announce the publication of the 5th volume of the New School Economic Review, entitled, “What Is Economics?” This year’s journal includes a brief discussion on a department wide survey set, a special comment on the state of the economic discipline, an interview with Peter Radford of the World Economics Association, two peer-reviewed papers covering Marxian, Keynesian, and Neoclassical economics, as well as the launch of our Working Paper Series, with a paper on RCTs in development economics.  These contributions promote critical discussion at such an exciting time for our “dismal science”.

My brother recently pointed out that the tent camps in front of St. Paul indicated that this would be the “winter of our discount-tents”… But I digress.

Beyond that John Kaye says to look at how people act, not how we think they should act – despite, as he says, the things he has been teaching over the last many years. Joe Stiglitz says to look at solving the problems of the developing world, Ian Goldin wants a toolbox and Anatole Kaletsky says these are exciting times to study economics. So yeah, despite the amount of interesting things these people usually have to say about economics, there’s not a lot to take away here. The cruel twist is perhaps Rob Johnson’s comment that he would give this advice to a ‘rising star in economics today’ … Of course, said rising star would probably not be coming with your radical or different ideas.

I think Deirdre McCloskey’s letter to a graduate student is a better time to spend five minutes, so let me leave you with her closing sentiment:

Please, please, my dear, be brave, and remake our splendid subject, the intelligent student of prudence, by bringing it back to science. I’ll hire you, if I can. And you’ll have a worthwhile life in science.

Courtesy of Banx at the FT

Back at the keyboard after a hectic late summer which included getting a final sign-off on the thesis, so that is all done, dusted and deposited in the university library. And what a day to be back. In a few hours they will announce who is going to win the Prize for Economics in memory of Alfred Nobel, and if Fama gets it this year I think it will be good fun. He was odds on favourite two years ago, but since the crash and recession all odds are off.

Harvard even had an on-line pool, but had to shut it down due to legal reasons. Oh well, we’ll know in a few hours. Either way, we’re back to our blogging ways now that term has properly started and there can be no more conference distractions.

Unfortunately, we have been advised by Harvard University to immediately shut down the Nobel pool due to legal reasons, and we have decided to comply with this request. We will fully reimburse the money of all participants, and we apologize for any inconvenience this creates for you. All participants will be contacted by email. (http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~pollmann/nobel/)

Wikipedia trivia: if you take any article, click on the first link in the article text not in parentheses or italics, and then repeat, you will eventually end up at “Philosophy”.

I thought that sounded like a good game, and a really nice urban legend so I went ahead and looked at economics… It gave the following string: Economics -> Social sciences -> fields -> academic -> community -> living -> life -> objects -> Philosophy… Admittedly I found a couple of loops, but then someone trumped it all and built a script to check how far this link to philosophy holds…  1,000 iterations later only 11 did not close at Philosophy. ELEVEN!  (check out the mapping here) I think that is pretty good proof that life boils down to philosophy.

Of the 11 left-over they ended in seven ‘sinks’ according to New Scientist: Architecture, gender, German reunification, Grail message, Iraq war, pragmatism and process manufacturing.  Not sure what that that could mean?